develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from October 2001

The perl6 quandry was Re: [PATCH] core-only patch for clamp/readonly hashes

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Dave Goehrig
Date:
October 31, 2001 04:40
Subject:
The perl6 quandry was Re: [PATCH] core-only patch for clamp/readonly hashes
Message ID:
20011031014155.B15043@cthulhu-burger.com
On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 01:16:23AM +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
> 
> No, it's the fact that we're encouraging modifying the core to support
> something that could be done in a module.

[snip hack pod]

> How many of those paragraphs would you like to remove?

I realize that my meger skill with words is insufficient to the task of
converting any true believers in the faith of podhack, though I must 
respond.  I say ALL of them.  

It is exactly because of those words and this fear of change that people
fear perl has stagnated.  They are why so many of us are waiting on the 
perl6 mailing lists.  It is why the god Larry is bestowing his revelations
upon the flock, and the good shepherd Damian is preaching to the stray.
Because though we speak the language ever day of our lives, it has become
too much of a holy tongue, fit only for performing priestly acts of ritual
programming.  Is it not ironic that our fear of spawning new dialects of perl
has spawed a Tower of Babel in perl6?

I will be the first to agree that many new forms are best achieved in
modules.  Yet there are many concepts, rwx permissions on scalars being
one of them, that are best enforced by the core. 

Maybe Perl really does need another implementation / dialect in order to
remain a living language.  This argument you have presented has almost
convinced me.

David J. Goehrig,

Who is going back to the shadows to lurk,


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About